The Wick wrote on Jun 24^th, 2008 at 3:17am:


Fill me in please. What is the rumour about Charlie?

What's the news about them playing together???

The Wick wrote on Jun 24^th, 2008 at 3:17am:


The project is about not paying royalties to Mr. Perks 

Is it possible The Stones are negotiating a record contract, and that being as their entire back catalog comes with them in the new contract in turn Mick wants Bill's input on the cash amount and the specifics of the deal because he is also to receive royalty's from the sales of their back catalog?

In essence, Wyman should still be "in" on that aspect on The bands business endeavors since it directly affects his pocket book and he was part of that back catalog as much as anyone.

Is this a possibility? This seems like a definite possibility to me but still I'm not positive. I'm not sure what it is he is speaking of...?


Ian

This may well be the most cogent post ever from you Ian! That is very real possibility. I mean this post makes way more sense then the "Mick is not on the cover of TY" thread from a couple of years back.

Congrats! Even a broken clock is right twice a day!



Riffy

Wyman has always described himself as the historian of the band. Mick might be planning to release some lost gems and wants Bill's input. I'd rather that than new stuff.

Riffhard wrote on Jun 24^th, 2008 at 10:42pm:

________________________

Well, Glencar and Riffhard you both have said a few things over the last few years that have turned out to be incorrect.

However, bringing up the past or including irrelevant topics from previous arguments only shows immaturity.

If you feel like you should compliment then by all means do so. However, lacing a compliment with an irrelevant jab from the past or a including an insult that is candy-coated is more-over the latter rather than the previous.

I was wrong and way out of touch on the "Tattoo You" thing. But guess what, I admit that and have no qualms about saying so or accepting it. Nor have I hid from the subject or got angry over the fact of it all. I wish I could say we all here have did the same when we are incorrect or mis-judge something, but the truth of the matter is that this is something I have not seen many board members do when they are in the same situation...


Ian

Ian Billen wrote on Jun 26^th, 2008 at 2:00am:

Bitch please! list any things I said that were incorrect. You da foo!

Ian Billen wrote on Jun 26^th, 2008 at 2:00am:


Ian there is a reason that people use this emoticon---> It means that the poster, in this case myself, was just yanking your chain, pulling your leg, getting your goat, taking the piss, fucking with you.

Oh, and I have never once been wrong! That's a damndable dirty liberal lie!


Riffy

Quote:

____________________________

...aghhhh, this is just silly.

OK. Alright, to shed some light on who is always willing to point the finger and who does not

Speaking of Tatoo You, and opinions on albums.

Glencar, weren't you one of the people that was arguing so strongly against me in my opinion that The Rolling Stones were probably almost all finished in terms of recording a new album around the end of April 2005? Wern't YOU one of the people that said in late April, 2005  that I simply could not know what I was talking about???in the spring of 2005 (May to be exact) Mick Jagger was "specifically" asked how much was "almost" when he stated the album was "almost finished". He said it was "85% finished".

guess what....the only person I ribbed about it was Gazza. Why? Because he never throws anything in anyones face. And for ONCE I may of been more correct than most here (you were included).

Now, in hearing Micks exact response, with percentage given no less, I'd say 85% is "mostly complete".

Did I ever throw that in your face? It has been three years now and have I ever brought it up to you or anyone again? There were entire threads on this very issue in which several people here said that because to their knowledge The Stones were not spending much time in the same country, Charlies had cancer, and Ronnies was doing Rehab that I was totally nuts.

Well, as I said then....for them to be holding a press conference so near, and a tour to follow so soon the album  HAD to be almost finished at that point. Turns out ....my assumption was dead on.

Did I ever mention it to you, or any other person (besides a friendly jab to Gazza who is always cool and is almost ALWAYS right...so I just had to rib him in this instance)?

How many times have you razzed me about Tattoo You...among other things?    ....Need I say more?

Ian

Quote:

_________________________

We were not speaking about recording new material in general. We were speaking of the state of A Bigger Bang at that time and the debate was over if they had an album almost ready at that point (which, at the time we did not even know the name of this album).

My argument was they certainly must, and simply had to have an album almost finished based on the time-line they were on, their schedule coming up, and their personal comments. It all was in place in my eyes.

You, and many others, stated I was a loon for ever suggesting this notion and were hell bent against that idea. There were threads based on this debate alone.

As things turned out they were "85%" finished according to Mick right around the time of our very debate over this. Strangely concerning the situation at hand, Mick gave an exact percentage when he was pressured about it by a reporter at the press conference so there was not really any room for any more debate over it (let alone continuing to label and pass me off as an ass over my opinion on the matter before the fruition of it all). 

Now ....when did I throw that in anyones face? Did I even mention this to you or anyone besides one friendly Jabb to Gazza, who of all intent had some credible reasons for his analysis on the situation and was not simply there to argue with me and call me a fool ...as others were. 

Ian

I'm sure you do!

mojoman wrote on Jun 24^th, 2008 at 11:29pm:


You nailed it on the hread bro, or to put it differentely how come Bill and his total lack of musical education was able to come up with such great bass playing and that whatshisname, oh yeah The Munch, rarely comes out of the background "mush".

Anyone who doesn't agree should watch Let's Spend the Night Together and see how Bill essentially holds everything together, arguably Keith was still a great guitar player at the time too. Now they need 5+ guys to do the same thing, sad, sad, sad !

Took me a while to figure out you had replied to my message and not missposted, is something wrong with my browser or is it your quotes ?

Anyway, yes that's pretty accurate, I'd push the comparison a bit further by saying that Darryl fills up the space, and to me annoyingly with that nondescript "fat" sound, while Bill is a melodic player with his "little hands that could" (to paraphrase someone here, MaxJugglar ?). I always thought that Keith and Ron were overrated as bass players, except maybe on Fingerpint File, although that might have been MicK Taylor playing, can't remember now.

Yes, Mick has a similar "little hands that could" playing as Bill in a way, maybe they were exchanging tips !

BTW, there's generally no need to quote the entire message if it's just above yours, just hit reply and type away!

TenThousandMotels wrote on Jun 29^th, 2008 at 9:27am:


_______________________________

"It's all Charlie's fault"? If Charlie would of just put his foot down Bill would of stayed?

Sir, lets not just put the blame on the closest dude to it all when he has no control of someones thought processes or feelings towards something.

So that was what 15 years and a hand full of tours and a couple albums ago. Do you think Bill would of just said, OK sure, tour after tour, year after year, city after city, night after night?

You can't force someone to do something that just isn't in their heart anymore. You have to let them do their thing. If they return, well great, if not, you cannot control their inner wants. Charlie knows that. This is why he simply let it go. Bill Wyman did not leave The Rolling Stones  on a whim. It was a heart felt decision.

Charlie understood all that. Keith was pissed. That's just Keith. Do you understand what I mean?


Ian

"You can't force someone to do something that just isn't in their heart anymore."

Bull shit. His heart was in it....thats where his heart is. Something else went wrong. Bill pines for the Stones everyday....just read his books, website and blogs. He CRAVES the Stones. That's his baby....his mother,...his father......I'll bet he cries everyday that he ain't "there".

TenThousandMotels wrote on Jun 29^th, 2008 at 1:30pm:


____________________________

It "was" his baby. He will always be a Rolling Stone. He is just not active anymore with them.

He DID develop a true fear of flying but this was not the only reason he left the band. He does not "CRAVE" being back with The Stones. He has had many opportunities to play with them in Europe if he would of liked. Did he? Did he ever suggest this? He could of made plans and rehearsed or even recorded with them in Europe and did some shows if he made plans for it with The Stones. The Stones are a global thing. He knows that. Wyman did nothing. If he is yearning for a spot on stage again with The Stones as you say he would of surely made a move to it right while they were in his back yard on several occasions. Wyman would surely still have a spot with The Stones if he really wanted to do it. He has not moved an inch towards getting together again with The Stones in fifteen long years.... Doesn't this tell you something?

Ian